OiRc 0001 Zip nada nothing Sweet Fanny Adam

This is voice-only podcast, and yes I could do video but there's no point in discussing something like ownership in anything than voice.

I've somethings to say but nothing to show. Hence, I get to go easy on my bandwidth with this podcast. That will change when we get into GUI designs and concepts that are more easily shown than talked about.

I'm also asking for feedback on this topic at OiRc@artdogs.org so you can reply, or expand on a point, suggest things or just call me an air head.

The topic this term in school, Metropolitan College of New York, Term 6, Fall of 2005, is Managing Financial Resources. So this first podcast is actually going to discuss managing financial resources.

In order to link it back to my obsession, object oriented software design and development, we're going to cover the economic aspects of object ownership.

Who really owns objects? What difference does it make? What are the benefits and costs of really using the internet to manage objects and instances?

Who really owns objects? This is actually trickier than it sounds, as is the assignment of responsibility for the objects, their instantiation, maintenance and dis-instantiation.

Lets take a case in point, the lowly ZIP code.

Its just a part of someone's address, right?

Well actually, its a relationship between a fixed location and a structure created by the United States Postal Service. In effect the USPS owns the ZIP codes. Zip actually stands for something: “Zoning Improvement Plan” and it was created to divide the geography according to the USPS distribution network.

The USPS are responsible for creating (instantiating) them, (then postmaster General John A. Gronouski announced that the ZIP Code would begin on July 1, 1963. About ten years later, Canada implemented its own postal coding system,)

They are responsible for maintaining them, adding, removing and altering codes when necessary for help them move the mail through changes in demographics. This can cause problems, like incorrect codes being used.

When the object definition of the zip code changes, like the USPS did back in 1983 to a 5 + 4 or 9 digit zip code, well that when it all falls down because, though the USPS owns the codes, they don't own the thousands of databases that their zip codes were used in.

That is a bigger problem than you think. Pay attention now, I'm actually on topic: Managing Financial Resources.

First there was an expensive advertising campaign, which didn't really reach the population. If you're a US citizen you're probably not using them even now and its been in use since 1983, since its now 2005,that shows you how much people are paying attention, and the problems of changing all of the data bases to reflect the desired reality is that it is entirely dependent on factors outside the control of the USPS.

Managing financial resources would lead me to question the wisdom of using advertising since there was such a low rate of return. Its like shoveling money into a high-efficiency furnace and hoping that people catch the small smoke signal. Are they looking? Are they interested? Chance favors the prepared mind. All the other ones don't mind and the message signal is lost in the noisy medium.

Every country has some variation of the zip code: the postal code in Canada, the postal code in England, to name a few I'm familiar with, and the geographic divisions of Prefecture in Japan, Departements in France and all the rest with which that I'm not familiar with. They all have the same problem.

Now there are ways the USPS could deal with the situation, such as just refusing to deliver mail, or sending it into a grey-hole for coding, the mail's eventual emergence being a mater of conjecture and occasional humor. People do start to get the message after a while. They update the definition of the databases, even if these are kept on the back of envelopes.

But it sets up the USPS for a repeat of the whole mess when, not if but when, they respond to changing conditions once again. Now once a piece of mail is sent, its sent. Its actual destination, coding and all, becomes a matter of historical record.

The problem lies not in the object instances, the actual pieces of mail, but in the object itself.

Enter the internet and IPv6.

128 bit's worth of pointers to objects. That works out to 340 onzetillion , 282 zentillion, 366 neptillion, 920 octillion, 938 septrillion, 463 sextillion, 463 quintillion, 374 quadrillion, 607 trillion, 431 billion, 768 million, 211 thousand, 456 objects. That's a lot of objects. Don't worry about what the number groupings are called. I didn't and just made up the names. The point still remains. That's a lot of objects.

What if the corporate users of the USPS could just point to the entry in USPS database and not have to worry about how the USPS organizes the service.

Do we really care about how the codes are set up? Delivering the mail is the USPS's job, not ours. Do we really care about the hoops the USPS has to jump through to get the mail delivered? Do we care about how the USPS is organized?

How about UPS and FedEx who also use zip codes but use entirely different systems for routing based on their own delivery mechanisms.

Problem is that the zip code is used as a pretty tightly mapped geo-spacial coordinate system and used not just by the USPS but by anybody who needs to know where something specific lies. But the problem of multiple use merely exacerbates the problem of maintaining Zip codes.

Users, specially corporations, could supply the USPS, UPS, FedEx and other with a GPS code and let the carrier route however they need to in order to insure delivery within their specific Service Level Agreement parameters.

Thankfully, there's no truth to a proposal for vanity Zip codes. But, practically speaking, IPv6 could accommodate one since there is a disconnect between the real world and the cyber one. A DNS (domain name server) could accomplish that. Your email address or personal web page could contain a link to a GPS coordinate to where you happen to be, or where you happen to say you hang your hat.

Dang, that's not quite the direction that I wanted to go in. I'm solving the wrong problem.

Lets get back to the focus of this semester: Managing Financial Resources

How much does it cost to effectuate a change in the postal codes? Its a valid point as the costs from the last change in ZIP codes are still being assumed by agencies outside the USPS.

These agents are doing the changes but as inexpensively as possible as part of their scheduled or unscheduled maintenance cycles. But its still an enormously expensive undertaking, we're just spreading the cost over time (which gets into the time value of money,) and inconveniencing the USPS in the process as they can't just flip a switch on the external interface just like they do on their internal systems.

I think that this is enough for the first podcast. I've already wasted enough of your time. Or maybe not...

For feedback on this or any other topic email me at OiRc@artdogs.org You can reply, or expand on a point, suggest things or just call me an air head.